Unjust Enrichment

Subscribe to Unjust Enrichment via RSS

Paintiffs, who had suffered signficant losses on variable annuity policies sold to them by the defendant agents and insurance companies, asserted claims on multiple theories: breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, unfair and deceptive practices, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, and unjust enrichment. 

The Court dismissed some claims and ordered the Plaintiffs to replead others with more particularity. 

It held that Plaintiffs could proceed on their claims against some of the agents for breach of fiduciary duty, given the Plaintiffs alleged lack of financial sophistication…

Continue Reading Cox v. Mitchell, February 6, 2008 (Tennille)(unpublished)

This case involved a troubled company, whose board of directors had hired turnaround consultants to assist with management. When the composition of the board of directors changed, the new board sued the consultants, and others, for fraud and unjust enrichment, alleging that the consultants had withheld information from the board and that they had been unjustly enriched (i.e. overpaid). The Court denied a motion to dismiss on the fraud claim, although it said that plaintiffs’ claim was tenuous.

The Court granted the motion to dismiss as to the unjust enrichment…

Continue Reading Connor v. Monarch Hosiery Mills, Inc., 2006 WL 4453451 (November 20, 2006)(Tennille)(unpublished)

The Court held that plaintiff, an insurance agent who had given up two profitable territories based upon the representations of defendants that he would be given two new territories, stated a claim for fraud. The Court noted that allegations based upon information and belief do not satisfy Rule 9(b), but said there were sufficient facts pled without that qualification for plaintiff to survive the motion.

The Court was clearly troubled, however, by the quality of the facts specified in the complaint to support the allegation that the defendants never intended…

Continue Reading Perkins v. Healthmarkets, Inc., 2007 NCBC 25 (N.C. Super. Ct. July 30, 2007)(Diaz)

Following a thorough discussion of the elements of a valid contract, the Court found a question of material fact whether the parties had agreed on all the material terms of the contract which plaintiff claimed entitled him to a significant bonus. Plaintiff was not required to show that the bonus had actually been paid in prior years in order to recover. The Court dismissed, however, plaintiff’s claim for an additional bonus because it found that the parties had never agreed, during their negotiations over additional compensation, how it would be…

Continue Reading Kornegay v. Aspen Asset Group, LLC, 2006 NCBC 12 (N.C. Super. Ct. Sept. 26, 2006)(Diaz)

Plaintiffs sold their stock in Citizens Savings Bank, and the stock increased in value significantly after Citizens merged with BB&T. Plaintiffs claimed that the various buyers of the stock had been unjustly enriched. The court granted summary judgment, because the buyer had no knowledge of the merger transaction and because Plaintiffs had already recovered a significant settlement from a bank officer who misled them as to the status of merger negotiations.

Full OpinionContinue Reading Frazier v. Beard, 1996 NCBC 1 (N.C. Super. Ct. Oct. 24, 1996)(Tennille), aff’d, 130 N.C.App. 484, 506 S.E.2d 298 (1998)